Atrophy Pronunciation

I had a conversation with a friend in health care today about the pronunciation of atrophy.

Obviously the dictionary says "a-tro-fee" for all uses, noun or verb.

However, I thought you could say "a-tro-fi" with a long i sound when using it as a verb.

He has atrophy. It will atrophy. In the latter I had always pronounced it with a long i sound. Apparently, I'm wrong, but maybe it has to do with having parents from Pennsylvania? Anyone else say it funny? My friends thought I was going all sassy on them when I said it that way.

Mm, from a linguistic point of view, it's "supposed" to be pronounced the same way: a-truh-fee. According to the Macmillan Dictionary (of American Pronunciation) they're said on in the same (as with all other dictionary lookups as well).

It's just one of those things that people do with either/neither: change the pronunciation based on the context. Why, I don't know.

I've always heard both noun & verb pronounced the same way in the US, as an "ee" ending, not an "eye", including when spoken by doctors in its medical sense. Although it's not a word one hears a great deal as one travels, so I may have passed through areas that use the "eye" verbal pronunciation without knowing it.

Language likes to make things more simple as it develops. So while the dictionary entries may indicate the same pronunciation, we are seeing two separate pronunciations to differentiate between two parts of speech with drastically different syntactical uses even though their spelled the same way.

The difference in pronunciation, then, helps us gain better understanding of how the word is used in context. This is particularly important since English is a "speaker-oriented" language in that if there is any miscommunication or misunderstanding, it is generally the fault of the speaker and not the listener. These linguistic cues help us to communicate more effectively.

For the record, I've always heard the two pronunciations as matched up with their differing parts of speech.

HungGarSig saidLanguage likes to make things more simple as it develops. So while the dictionary entries may indicate the same pronunciation, we are seeing two separate pronunciations to differentiate between two parts of speech with drastically different syntactical uses even though their spelled the same way.

The difference in pronunciation, then, helps us gain better understanding of how the word is used in context. This is particularly important since English is a "speaker-oriented" language in that if there is any miscommunication or misunderstanding, it is generally the fault of the speaker and not the listener. These linguistic cues help us to communicate more effectively.

For the record, I've always heard the two pronunciations as matched up with their differing parts of speech.

HungGarSig saidLanguage likes to make things more simple as it develops. So while the dictionary entries may indicate the same pronunciation, we are seeing two separate pronunciations to differentiate between two parts of speech with drastically different syntactical uses even though their spelled the same way.

The difference in pronunciation, then, helps us gain better understanding of how the word is used in context. This is particularly important since English is a "speaker-oriented" language in that if there is any miscommunication or misunderstanding, it is generally the fault of the speaker and not the listener. These linguistic cues help us to communicate more effectively.

For the record, I've always heard the two pronunciations as matched up with their differing parts of speech.

HungGarSig saidLanguage likes to make things more simple as it develops. So while the dictionary entries may indicate the same pronunciation, we are seeing two separate pronunciations to differentiate between two parts of speech with drastically different syntactical uses even though their spelled the same way.

The difference in pronunciation, then, helps us gain better understanding of how the word is used in context. This is particularly important since English is a "speaker-oriented" language in that if there is any miscommunication or misunderstanding, it is generally the fault of the speaker and not the listener. These linguistic cues help us to communicate more effectively.

For the record, I've always heard the two pronunciations as matched up with their differing parts of speech.

HungGarSig saidLanguage likes to make things more simple as it develops. So while the dictionary entries may indicate the same pronunciation, we are seeing two separate pronunciations to differentiate between two parts of speech with drastically different syntactical uses even though their spelled the same way.

The difference in pronunciation, then, helps us gain better understanding of how the word is used in context. This is particularly important since English is a "speaker-oriented" language in that if there is any miscommunication or misunderstanding, it is generally the fault of the speaker and not the listener. These linguistic cues help us to communicate more effectively.

For the record, I've always heard the two pronunciations as matched up with their differing parts of speech.

Changing the topic, I recently read a study that may support Hemingway's recommendation. It's established that alcohol can impair higher thinking processes, as well as sensory perception, memory, motor skills & coordination.

But what's new is the discovery of the possibility that drinking actually helps with creative thinking. Drinking (short of flat-out drunk to the point of incapacitation) lowers inhibitions and in so doing may also result in thinking that's more unconventional, original and out of the box for an individual. In other words, drinking induces traits that are often associated with the creative process.

So drink a little, develop original thoughts and write them down. Sober up later to correct your grammar & spelling. It seems to have worked for Hemingway.